This trial was over when they went for a murder in the second degree charge. It won't happen.

Oh sorry, I thought you were privy to some new info. We know armed Zim was stalking unarmed Martin, we know there was a fight that cost Zim some skin, and we know Zim shot Martin. And we have Zim's side of the story. I really can't wait for this trial to be over so the derpulation can stop.

Really? You know he was stalking Martin? Please do cite a source for this because I can give you transcripts and audio that goes to the contrary. Seems like you're the one full of derpulation there chief.

The man with known power-trip and anger management issues biatching about how "they always get away" is a good start.

tyrajam:gimmegimme: tyrajam: gimmegimme:Can you please present guidelines as to what kind of online rhetoric is justification for a person's cold-blooded murder?

I think it's somewhere in the guidelines that when you jump on someone and start bashing their head into the pavement, they'll probably try to shoot you if they can.

What you said makes no sense. What possible motivation do people have for bringing Martin's online speech into a discussion of his death?

What I'm saying-and I'll type slowly so you can follow-is that all that matters is that Zimmerman was attacked and his head was being bashed into the cement. That is why the police initially decided not to arrest Zimmerman.

You need to search your heart and search your soul and when you find me there, you'll search no more. Do you realize that you are excusing the shooting on a self-defense basis and ignoring the fact that the 17-year-old kid also had ample opportunity to be afraid for his life? Why in the world would you only have concern for one person and not the other?

Tatsuma:Wolf_Blitzer: Trayvon Martin had absolutely no documented history of violence. George Zimmerman on the other hand...

Well, except for the fights he himself talked about on social media sites, the fact that he assaulted a bus driver (adult in position of authority asking him what he was doing) and he was caught with burglary tools and stolen property in his locker.

There's no evidence that any assault happened against a bus driver. Martin was suspended for marijuana.

If having tweets claiming to be in fights makes you violent, the entire Internet Tough Guy Brigade here should be in prison for life.

mr intrepid:duffblue: gimmegimme: FloridaFarkTag: MJMaloney187: Wait? Does the article say the defense was allowed to use all that? I thought the article said the hearing was next week ...

No, it has yet to be allowed

Some of it will be allowed. This judge will be overturned on appeal if evidence is not allowed and Zimmerman is convicted....esp any evidence showing TM stoned around the time of incident, pot use, and any time the prosecutors spew the "Trayvon was a 14 yr old honor student" BS

It is obvious that the prosecution is in trouble.... they want all the negative Trayvon evidence excluded....you can't lynch an innocent man if you are caught cold busted lying

Just wonder how much of their ghetto the Black Racists gonna burn when they can't lynch Zimmerman...

Ted Nugent isn't black...

You probably aren't old enough to remember the Rodney king riots

The "negative Trayon evidence" might be considered largely irrelevant. Zimmerman didn't know anything about him, except what happened that night. And the fact that he lost a fight might serve as a motive for his pursuit and shooting.

You slam the back of my head into the ground, you die. Period. I would rather go to jail if the alternatives are death or mental retardation.

Take your head out of your arse for a second and pretend Zimmerman is your grandfather. What would you want your grandfather to do? That punk lived like a gangster and he died like a gangster. BET ought to give Zimmerman a medal for keeping the brand alive.

Abox:seadoo2006: Abox: Imagine a road rage incident where you chase a guy down because what the hell you have a gun, you get into a fight, and you shoot the guy dead because you were losing the fight. B-b-b-but I was standing my ground!

That's exactly the type of altercation that SYG was passed for

Chasing somebody down and shooting someone because you're on the losing end of a fight that would never had happened had you ACTUALLY stood your ground? Ah, sure why not.

Your scenario is completely different than what happened in the Zimmerman case. When you chase the person down, you are the aggressor until you end the altercation. Anything you do means you did it without provocation and as such are not allowed to "stand your ground".Zimmerman did not chase down Martin, no matter how much you want to scream it at the top of your lungs the evidence clearly shows it didn't happen that way.

MJMaloney187:mr intrepid: duffblue: gimmegimme: FloridaFarkTag: MJMaloney187: Wait? Does the article say the defense was allowed to use all that? I thought the article said the hearing was next week ...

No, it has yet to be allowed

Some of it will be allowed. This judge will be overturned on appeal if evidence is not allowed and Zimmerman is convicted....esp any evidence showing TM stoned around the time of incident, pot use, and any time the prosecutors spew the "Trayvon was a 14 yr old honor student" BS

It is obvious that the prosecution is in trouble.... they want all the negative Trayvon evidence excluded....you can't lynch an innocent man if you are caught cold busted lying

Just wonder how much of their ghetto the Black Racists gonna burn when they can't lynch Zimmerman...

Ted Nugent isn't black...

You probably aren't old enough to remember the Rodney king riots

The "negative Trayon evidence" might be considered largely irrelevant. Zimmerman didn't know anything about him, except what happened that night. And the fact that he lost a fight might serve as a motive for his pursuit and shooting.

You slam the back of my head into the ground, you die. Period. I would rather go to jail if the alternatives are death or mental retardation.

Take your head out of your arse for a second and pretend Zimmerman is your grandfather. What would you want your grandfather to do? That punk lived like a gangster and he died like a gangster. BET ought to give Zimmerman a medal for keeping the brand alive.

bugontherug:AngryDragon: Note this part of the timeline was confirmed by the police.

Nobody saw Trayvon slamming Zimmerman's head into the sidewalk.

Try an experiment. Get a nice, soft pad, maybe a pillow, and a friend.

Lay flat on your back, and have your friend straddle you at the waist. Then have him try to "slam" your head back into the soft padding. Remind him that he's not allowed to pull your hair, because Zimmerman's head was shaved.

Without a very great difference in strength, I doubt it's even possible to slam someone's head into the ground if he offers resistance. Especially not from the position described.

gimmegimme:ChaosStar: What the defense is saying is that Martin wasn't the angel the media made him out to be, in fact he was the type likely to punch Zimmerman in the nose and beat his head on the sidewalk for a perceived slight to himself and this online rhetoric goes to prove that. There's your answer.

As to your second, no, Zimmerman wasn't playing police officer. He was being a concerned citizen who was reporting everything he was seeing to the police, and following the instructions from the dispatcher including not following Martin when he was told he didn't need to.

Why does Martin's online rhetoric matter, but Zimmerman's history of violence doesn't? If Zimmerman ended the pursuit after being told "you don't have to do that," why wasn't he driving home?

tenpoundsofcheese: If the definition of "playing police officer" is following someone, then yes, he was following Martin so by your definition he was playing police officer. Now, there is nothing illegal about following someone, so I am not sure what your point is.

Why would you imply that he needed to get permission from someone to follow someone else?

Surely Zimmerman had a good reason to follow Martin, right?

I don't know you keep harping on this. It doesn't farking matter.

Re-read quietwalker's post. It is really good. I didn't know parts of the story either.

The reality of all of this is that we are never going to know the "truth".I wish Martin wasn't shot.I expect that the defense can plant enough reasonable doubt to get him acquitted.

Fark disappointed me. Zimmerman deserves the death penalty. It doesn't matter the content of Martin's character except for one thing, was he confrontational? Zimmerman has a history of being wound up tight with a justice complex. Martin defended himself and stood his ground. If Zimmerman gets off he and his wife better move to Peru with mama. He won't be safe anywhere state side.

Wolf_Blitzer:Tatsuma: Wolf_Blitzer: Trayvon Martin had absolutely no documented history of violence. George Zimmerman on the other hand...

Well, except for the fights he himself talked about on social media sites, the fact that he assaulted a bus driver (adult in position of authority asking him what he was doing) and he was caught with burglary tools and stolen property in his locker.

There's no evidence that any assault happened against a bus driver. Martin was suspended for marijuana.

If having tweets claiming to be in fights makes you violent, the entire Internet Tough Guy Brigade here should be in prison for life.

Can you please present guidelines as to what kind of online rhetoric is justification for a person's death caused by some means?

tenpoundsofcheese: gimmegimme: Why was Zimmerman following Martin? Under what authority did he engage in an armed pursuit?

weird questions.since when do you need authority to follow someone?

You're really denying that Zim was playing police officer?

I'll answer your question by telling you that no one is saying that the online rhetoric is justification for Martin's death. You're the only one making that connection.What the defense is saying is that Martin wasn't the angel the media made him out to be, in fact he was the type likely to punch Zimmerman in the nose and beat his head on the sidewalk for a perceived slight to himself and this online rhetoric goes to prove that. There's your answer..

Is there any evidence of this perceived slight that you mention? Because all the evidence and purported evidence that you have listed here in your posts are also consistent with Martin's perhaps perceiving that he and/or his father's fiancée's condo unit were in danger from a stranger who was following him for no reason that he could fathom.

This trial was over when they went for a murder in the second degree charge. It won't happen.

Oh sorry, I thought you were privy to some new info. We know armed Zim was stalking unarmed Martin, we know there was a fight that cost Zim some skin, and we know Zim shot Martin. And we have Zim's side of the story. I really can't wait for this trial to be over so the derpulation can stop.

Really? You know he was stalking Martin? Please do cite a source for this because I can give you transcripts and audio that goes to the contrary. Seems like you're the one full of derpulation there chief.

The man with known power-trip and anger management issues biatching about how "they always get away" is a good start.

You could win an Olympic gold with that leap buddy.A man has anger management issues, and he complaining that the crooks always get away because police response time is so slow, clearly that means he was stalking Martin through the neighborhood.What deductive reasoning are you using huh?

LegacyDL:When did text messages become de facto proof that warrants killing people?

They don't. But they do become relevant when asserting the affirmative defense of self defense.

Without the defense... prejudicial. With the defense... probative.

This is likely why they elected not to have a "Stand Your Ground" hearing where the charges could have been dismissed. That allows the jury to see the phone contents in the context of him proving his affirmative defense.

This trial was over when they went for a murder in the second degree charge. It won't happen.

Oh sorry, I thought you were privy to some new info. We know armed Zim was stalking unarmed Martin, we know there was a fight that cost Zim some skin, and we know Zim shot Martin. And we have Zim's side of the story. I really can't wait for this trial to be over so the derpulation can stop.

Really? You know he was stalking Martin? Please do cite a source for this because I can give you transcripts and audio that goes to the contrary. Seems like you're the one full of derpulation there chief.

The man with known power-trip and anger management issues biatching about how "they always get away" is a good start.

You could win an Olympic gold with that leap buddy.A man has anger management issues, and he complaining that the crooks always get away because police response time is so slow, clearly that means he was stalking Martin through the neighborhood.What deductive reasoning are you using huh?

Why was he not in his truck after being told he 'didn't need to follow Martin'? Why did he just not go home, or go wherever he wanted to meet the cops, then call them back?

ChaosStar:FloridaFarkTag: ChaosStar: A Terrible Human: Why didn't Zimmerman stay the fark in his car like he was told to?

He might have, if he had been told to stay in his car. He wasn't though; he was asked by the dispatcher if he was following him (Martin), he said yes, the dispatcher told him that he didn't need to do that to which he replied ok and stopped.

A dispatcher is not a law enforcement officer in Seminole County.....they cannot order you to not do something. A dispatcher could be prosecuted and sent to prison if they mislead that they are law enforcement and they are not

If the Tobias Funke clone of a prosecutor goes down this route w the dispatcher....GZ lawyers will go analrapist on him. Tobias would be making one huge mistake... he blue the case

(Welcome back Arrested Development)

I'm not sure what side you're coming down on on this. I never said the dispatcher told him what to do or said they were a leo?They told him that he didn't need to follow Martin, he said ok and stopped. Everyone keeps clinging to the (madeup) story that Zimmerman charged up to Martin and started demanding answers from him when the only time they exchanged words was right before Martin started the altercation that led to the shooting.

We both believe Zim is innocent

Probably should have used another post to bring up what a dispatcher is....however, the gibberish spewd by Team Skittles is just not respondable

Tatsuma:Wolf_Blitzer: Trayvon Martin had absolutely no documented history of violence. George Zimmerman on the other hand...

Well, except for the fights he himself talked about on social media sites, the fact that he assaulted a bus driver (adult in position of authority asking him what he was doing) and he was caught with burglary tools and stolen property in his locker.

ChaosStar:Being on the losing side of a fight, where you're getting your head bashed open, is grounds for escalation of force when defending yourself, as you are in fear for your life. Especially when you didn't start said fight.

Except he did start the fight. Or are you now saying the kid dragged him out of his car? I mean youre making up other shiat, why not make up carjacking?

AirForceVet:If some strange man came up to me when I was 17 in the middle of a Florida night and demanded why I was in my neighborhood, I'd have told him to fark off. If he touched me, I'd have kicked his ass too.

As far as I'm concerned, this is the only thing that matters to me. Zimmerman was told to stand down. He didn't. Everyone says Zimmerman was allowed to stand his ground, and that he was beaten as a result. Well, excuse the fark out of me, but if that asshole had been following me, I would've beaten him unconscious, standing MY ground. Apparently it's ok for Zimmerman, a twat with a record of violence, to stand his ground, but not for the black kid- with no record.

A Terrible Human:Tatsuma: Wolf_Blitzer: Trayvon Martin had absolutely no documented history of violence. George Zimmerman on the other hand...

Well, except for the fights he himself talked about on social media sites, the fact that he assaulted a bus driver (adult in position of authority asking him what he was doing) and he was caught with burglary tools and stolen property in his locker.

So that means he totally deserved to die?

Nope, but putting the beat down on an armed, concerned citizen means he deserved to die. Put it another way, he beat up an armed dude ... that's some Darwin-level stupidity right there and yes, it's probably a good thing he's not around anymore.

Unknown_Poltroon:ChaosStar: Being on the losing side of a fight, where you're getting your head bashed open, is grounds for escalation of force when defending yourself, as you are in fear for your life. Especially when you didn't start said fight.

Except he did start the fight. Or are you now saying the kid dragged him out of his car? I mean youre making up other shiat, why not make up carjacking?

Of course he was carjacked! He was a thug hopped up on purple drank looking to break into white people houses!

BgJonson79:gimmegimme: FloridaFarkTag: LegacyDL: So by that logic if the kid was a drunk abusive Irish man that beat his wife it would be okay to shoot him as well.

When did text messages become de facto proof that warrants killing people?

Calling yourself "No Limit Ni--a" on twitter don't help either

Can you please present guidelines as to what kind of online rhetoric is justification for a person's cold-blooded murder?

Since there's been no trial, how can you say there's been a murder?

I'm not on the jury. "Alleged murder." Happy now?

jayphat:By far I am not a Zimmerman defender. HOWEVER, your article lends zero credence when you use this farking picture.[assets.nydailynews.com image 635x835]

In all honesty, folks, this happens with just about every crime or every person who dies. They use a pleasant picture. We had a guy in high school who died in a car crash while driving the wrong way down a one-way street with no lights on on a suspended license while drunk and high and driving with his knees, etc. The news and newspaper used his school picture for obvious reasons. Come on.

Tatsuma:So when trying to establish whether he was assaulted or not, it's irrelevant to present information specifically about Martin's character when it comes to violence, crime and drug abuse? That's racist?

How would you feel about the prosecution's presenting evidence of Zimmerman's previous run-ins with the law at trial? Irrelevant?

bugontherug:AngryDragon: Note this part of the timeline was confirmed by the police.

Nobody saw Trayvon slamming Zimmerman's head into the sidewalk.

Try an experiment. Get a nice, soft pad, maybe a pillow, and a friend.

Lay flat on your back, and have your friend straddle you at the waist. Then have him try to "slam" your head back into the soft padding. Remind him that he's not allowed to pull your hair, because Zimmerman's head was shaved.

Without a very great difference in strength, I doubt it's even possible to slam someone's head into the ground if he offers resistance. Especially not from the position described.

Tatsuma:Wolf_Blitzer: Trayvon Martin had absolutely no documented history of violence. George Zimmerman on the other hand...

Well, except for the fights he himself talked about on social media sites, the fact that he assaulted a bus driver (adult in position of authority asking him what he was doing) and he was caught with burglary tools and stolen property in his locker.

Seriously Tatsuma, you're usually smarter than this. The "bus driver assault" never happened (something ten seconds googling would've established), the "burglary tools" were a screwdriver, and it was never established that anything in his locker was stolen property. After that, you've got some tweets. Yup, kid was definitely a menace to society.

seadoo2006:A Terrible Human: Tatsuma: Wolf_Blitzer: Trayvon Martin had absolutely no documented history of violence. George Zimmerman on the other hand...

Well, except for the fights he himself talked about on social media sites, the fact that he assaulted a bus driver (adult in position of authority asking him what he was doing) and he was caught with burglary tools and stolen property in his locker.

So that means he totally deserved to die?

Nope, but putting the beat down on an armed, concerned citizen means he deserved to die. Put it another way, he beat up an armed dude ... that's some Darwin-level stupidity right there and yes, it's probably a good thing he's not around anymore.

So if I were unarmed, and approached by someone who I KNOW has been following me with unknown intent, who then pulls a gun on me, I should just accept the bullet? Or wait for an explanation, and risk...well, getting shot? Or should I attempt to defend myself?

Can you please present guidelines as to what kind of online rhetoric is justification for a person's death caused by some means?

tenpoundsofcheese: gimmegimme: Why was Zimmerman following Martin? Under what authority did he engage in an armed pursuit?

weird questions.since when do you need authority to follow someone?

You're really denying that Zim was playing police officer?

I'll answer your question by telling you that no one is saying that the online rhetoric is justification for Martin's death. You're the only one making that connection.What the defense is saying is that Martin wasn't the angel the media made him out to be, in fact he was the type likely to punch Zimmerman in the nose and beat his head on the sidewalk for a perceived slight to himself and this online rhetoric goes to prove that. There's your answer..

Is there any evidence of this perceived slight that you mention? Because all the evidence and purported evidence that you have listed here in your posts are also consistent with Martin's perhaps perceiving that he and/or his father's fiancée's condo unit were in danger from a stranger who was following him for no reason that he could fathom.

"Zimmerman told them he lost sight of Trayvon and was walking back to his SUV when Trayvon approached him from the left rear, and they exchanged words.Trayvon asked Zimmerman if he had a problem. Zimmerman said no and reached for his cell phone, he told police. Trayvon then said, "Well, you do now" or something similar and punched Zimmerman in the nose, according to the account he gave police." - Orlando SentinelYou don't really walk up to someone and ask them "do you have a problem" unless you feel like they've done or are doing something against you in some way.

seadoo2006:A Terrible Human: Tatsuma: Wolf_Blitzer: Trayvon Martin had absolutely no documented history of violence. George Zimmerman on the other hand...

Well, except for the fights he himself talked about on social media sites, the fact that he assaulted a bus driver (adult in position of authority asking him what he was doing) and he was caught with burglary tools and stolen property in his locker.

So that means he totally deserved to die?

Nope, but putting the beat down on an armed, concerned citizen means he deserved to die. Put it another way, he beat up an armed dude ... that's some Darwin-level stupidity right there and yes, it's probably a good thing he's not around anymore.

He was on the way to beating up an armed dude when Zimmerman shot and killed him. Can you at least acknowledge intellectually that Martin could have been afraid and could have been scared in the same way Zimmerman was scared?

I don't know if George Zimmerman is guilty of murdering Trayvon Martin or not. Only God can know that. Everybody in this thread who is God, raise your hands.

WhatI do know is that the entire thing could have been avoided had either party attempted to de-escalate the situation rather than keep escalating it. Can we focus on whether there's a cultural change here that we can collectively make to prevent future incidents, instead of rooting for/against Team Black Kid or Team Hispanic Man?

bugontherug:Nobody saw Trayvon slamming Zimmerman's head into the sidewalk.

I was going to quote the witnesses but then I realized 'Hey, it's bugontherug! We've already had this discussion when I pointed at all the witnesses showing Trayvon assaulting Zimmerman!' and then lost any will to waste my time.

Wolf_Blitzer:There's no evidence that any assault happened against a bus driver. Martin was suspended for marijuana.

If having tweets claiming to be in fights makes you violent, the entire Internet Tough Guy Brigade here should be in prison for life.

He also texted a picture of himself holding a gun, asked another one to help him buy one, and proclaimed himself to be a gangsta. That's way above and beyond ITG

After re-reviewing the facts, and reading through here, I'm actually a little confused. Maybe someone could clear things up for me

I can't exactly tell when someone is simply a gun hater, a cop/authority hater, a racist, motivated by some sort of politically correct guilt, or some combination of the above.

About the only folks I can detect are those who think drug users or thug-gangsters deserve death, and those who believe their assumptions are valid enough to circumvent the definition of existing laws.

ChaosStar:"Zimmerman told them he lost sight of Trayvon and was walking back to his SUV when Trayvon approached him from the left rear, and they exchanged words.Trayvon asked Zimmerman if he had a problem. Zimmerman said no and reached for his cell phone, he told police. Trayvon then said, "Well, you do now" or something similar and punched Zimmerman in the nose, according to the account he gave police." - Orlando SentinelYou don't really walk up to someone and ask them "do you have a problem" unless you feel like they've done or are doing something against you in some way.

Zimmerman said...Zimmerman said...Zimmerman said...

And "Do you have a problem?" is EXACTLY what people would ask if they were being pursued.

Can you please present guidelines as to what kind of online rhetoric is justification for a person's death caused by some means?

tenpoundsofcheese: gimmegimme: Why was Zimmerman following Martin? Under what authority did he engage in an armed pursuit?

weird questions.since when do you need authority to follow someone?

You're really denying that Zim was playing police officer?

I'll answer your question by telling you that no one is saying that the online rhetoric is justification for Martin's death. You're the only one making that connection.What the defense is saying is that Martin wasn't the angel the media made him out to be, in fact he was the type likely to punch Zimmerman in the nose and beat his head on the sidewalk for a perceived slight to himself and this online rhetoric goes to prove that. There's your answer..

Is there any evidence of this perceived slight that you mention? Because all the evidence and purported evidence that you have listed here in your posts are also consistent with Martin's perhaps perceiving that he and/or his father's fiancée's condo unit were in danger from a stranger who was following him for no reason that he could fathom.

"Zimmerman told them he lost sight of Trayvon and was walking back to his SUV when Trayvon approached him from the left rear, and they exchanged words.Trayvon asked Zimmerman if he had a problem. Zimmerman said no and reached for his cell phone, he told police. Trayvon then said, "Well, you do now" or something similar and punched Zimmerman in the nose, according to the account he gave police." - Orlando SentinelYou don't really walk up to someone and ask them "do you have a problem" unless you feel like they've done or are doing something against you in some way.

Again, we *only* have Zimmerman's word for that, backed up with zero evidence.

bugontherug:AngryDragon: Note this part of the timeline was confirmed by the police.

Nobody saw Trayvon slamming Zimmerman's head into the sidewalk.

Try an experiment. Get a nice, soft pad, maybe a pillow, and a friend.

Lay flat on your back, and have your friend straddle you at the waist. Then have him try to "slam" your head back into the soft padding. Remind him that he's not allowed to pull your hair, because Zimmerman's head was shaved.

Without a very great difference in strength, I doubt it's even possible to slam someone's head into the ground if he offers resistance. Especially not from the position described.

And what exactly was Trayvon holding onto?

Trayvon could have been holding onto his ears. It's not like Zimmerman was using them that night.

LordJiro:seadoo2006: A Terrible Human: Tatsuma: Wolf_Blitzer: Trayvon Martin had absolutely no documented history of violence. George Zimmerman on the other hand...

Well, except for the fights he himself talked about on social media sites, the fact that he assaulted a bus driver (adult in position of authority asking him what he was doing) and he was caught with burglary tools and stolen property in his locker.

So that means he totally deserved to die?

Nope, but putting the beat down on an armed, concerned citizen means he deserved to die. Put it another way, he beat up an armed dude ... that's some Darwin-level stupidity right there and yes, it's probably a good thing he's not around anymore.

So if I were unarmed, and approached by someone who I KNOW has been following me with unknown intent, who then pulls a gun on me, I should just accept the bullet? Or wait for an explanation, and risk...well, getting shot? Or should I attempt to defend myself?

Please show your evidence that the gun was pulled prior to Martin getting shot.

Unknown_Poltroon:ChaosStar: Being on the losing side of a fight, where you're getting your head bashed open, is grounds for escalation of force when defending yourself, as you are in fear for your life. Especially when you didn't start said fight.

Except he did start the fight. Or are you now saying the kid dragged him out of his car? I mean youre making up other shiat, why not make up carjacking?

Except he didn't. He lost Martin, was going back to his vehicle, Martin approached him, the spoke for the first time that night and Martin attacked Zimmerman. I would ask why this is so hard for people to comprehend but I know there's a million different stories out there containing a million different, incorrect nuances to the night.

Tatsuma:FuryOfFirestorm: If he had consumed "purple drank" he would have had codeine in his system, which is not the case. Also, "drank" makes you lethargic, not aggressive (codeine is a sedative). "Drank" requires cough syrup, sprite (or vodka) and sometimes Jolly Ranchers. None of these items were purchased from Trayvon the night of his murder.

Actually that's false, he had both sprite (well, a variant, it was not iced tea, as reported) and he had skittles (doesn't just have to be Jolly Ranchers) and he has documented discussion about using codeine and drinking purple drank.

Doesn't mean he was high on the night, more likely he went to buy what he needed and was going back home to get high on some sizzurp.

Back to the topic at hand, how would Martin's intent of taking codeine or his fondness for pot translate into violent tendencies? How is experimenting with drugs out of the norm for a teenager? Zimmerman's defense seems to be more based upon playing up fears in which drug users and young black males are demonized.

So Zimmerman gets jumped from behind and has face smashed into the sidewalk makes him the aggressive one? Martin deserved what he got. The only question now is how bad the blacks will riot when Zimmerman is found not guilty. We all know they won't be able to act like humans when it happens

Tatsuma:bugontherug: Nobody saw Trayvon slamming Zimmerman's head into the sidewalk.

I was going to quote the witnesses but then I realized 'Hey, it's bugontherug! We've already had this discussion when I pointed at all the witnesses showing Trayvon assaulting Zimmerman!' and then lost any will to waste my time.

Wolf_Blitzer: There's no evidence that any assault happened against a bus driver. Martin was suspended for marijuana.

If having tweets claiming to be in fights makes you violent, the entire Internet Tough Guy Brigade here should be in prison for life.

He also texted a picture of himself holding a gun, asked another one to help him buy one, and proclaimed himself to be a gangsta. That's way above and beyond ITG

I' mein a bit of a pickle...I can't find verification that Martin texted the gun picture to Zimmerman.

ChaosStar:"Zimmerman told them he lost sight of Trayvon and was walking back to his SUV when Trayvon approached him from the left rear, and they exchanged words.Trayvon asked Zimmerman if he had a problem. Zimmerman said no and reached for his cell phone, he told police. Trayvon then said, "Well, you do now" or something similar and punched Zimmerman in the nose, according to the account he gave police." - Orlando SentinelYou don't really walk up to someone and ask them "do you have a problem" unless you feel like they've done or are doing something against you in some way.

OF COURSE that's how it happened. There is no conceivable reason Zimmerman would make up something, its not like hes on the hook for murdering an unarmed kid in cold blood after accosting him on the street for no reason. TOTALLY believable that he would be telling the truth about a 17 year old kid attacking an armed guy.

gimmegimme:ChaosStar: "Zimmerman told them he lost sight of Trayvon and was walking back to his SUV when Trayvon approached him from the left rear, and they exchanged words.Trayvon asked Zimmerman if he had a problem. Zimmerman said no and reached for his cell phone, he told police. Trayvon then said, "Well, you do now" or something similar and punched Zimmerman in the nose, according to the account he gave police." - Orlando SentinelYou don't really walk up to someone and ask them "do you have a problem" unless you feel like they've done or are doing something against you in some way.

Zimmerman said...Zimmerman said...Zimmerman said...

And "Do you have a problem?" is EXACTLY what people would ask if they were being pursued.

"Do you have a problem?" is something you, and someone like Martin would say if you were being followed. Normal, rational people, might ask "why are you following me?" instead of trying to be an aggressive thug. This is exactly why the online material is credible evidence in the trial, it goes to show the type of person Martin was, the type that would punch first, ask questions later.

seadoo2006:LordJiro: seadoo2006: A Terrible Human: Tatsuma: Wolf_Blitzer: Trayvon Martin had absolutely no documented history of violence. George Zimmerman on the other hand...

Well, except for the fights he himself talked about on social media sites, the fact that he assaulted a bus driver (adult in position of authority asking him what he was doing) and he was caught with burglary tools and stolen property in his locker.

So that means he totally deserved to die?

Nope, but putting the beat down on an armed, concerned citizen means he deserved to die. Put it another way, he beat up an armed dude ... that's some Darwin-level stupidity right there and yes, it's probably a good thing he's not around anymore.

So if I were unarmed, and approached by someone who I KNOW has been following me with unknown intent, who then pulls a gun on me, I should just accept the bullet? Or wait for an explanation, and risk...well, getting shot? Or should I attempt to defend myself?

Please show your evidence that the gun was pulled prior to Martin getting shot.

Well, if the gun were under Zimmerman's shirt, there would be a bullethole in the shirt, right? And it's really hard to shoot someone in the chest if a gun is holstered.

Wolf_Blitzer:Seriously Tatsuma, you're usually smarter than this. The "bus driver assault" never happened (something ten seconds googling would've established), the "burglary tools" were a screwdriver, and it was never established that anything in his locker was stolen property. After that, you've got some tweets. Yup, kid was definitely a menace to society.

Martin admitted that it was indeed a burglary tool and that those were stolen property, he only denied that it was his. And for fark's sake, they found a bag with a screwdriver and 12 pieces of women's jewelery that he denied having stolen, you really are buying that?

Not just tweets, a picture of himself holding a gun, asking where he could buy one, asking another to split the cost in half with him, calling himself a gangsta, beating up a snitch.. He also sold drugs, took drugs, not just smoking weed but harder stuff as well

gimmegimme:He was on the way to beating up an armed dude when Zimmerman shot and killed him. Can you at least acknowledge intellectually that Martin could have been afraid and could have been scared in the same way Zimmerman was scared?

Zimmerman only got his gun out once he was on the ground with Martin on top. The reaction to being scared by a man with a gun is not to run toward him, it's to run away while screaming for help.

gimmegimme:tyrajam: gimmegimme:Can you please present guidelines as to what kind of online rhetoric is justification for a person's cold-blooded murder?

I think it's somewhere in the guidelines that when you jump on someone and start bashing their head into the pavement, they'll probably try to shoot you if they can.

What you said makes no sense. What possible motivation do people have for bringing Martin's online speech into a discussion of his death?

Because it tends to show Trayvon's not a perfect little honor student, as some have contended; if he's involved in violent activity on a regular basis, it's more likely he was at least partly the aggressor the night he got shot.

Is it fair? debatable...but 'blaming the victim' is an old tactic; used to be very common in rape cases, where the defense would attempt to bring in the victim's past sexual activity as relevant, although that's been curtailed in most jurisdictions.

For me, it comes down to the physical evidence; if GZ's injuries back up his story, he walks.

It hardly seems necessary. He was wearing a hoodie. I've read enough people's comments to know that this fact alone made it OK for George to shoot. By wearing a hoodie, he proclaimed to the world that he was up to no good. He was trying to conce

ChaosStar:Except he didn't. He lost Martin, was going back to his vehicle, Martin approached him, the spoke for the first time that night and Martin attacked Zimmerman. I would ask why this is so hard for people to comprehend but I know there's a million different stories out there containing a million different, incorrect nuances to the night.

This is the story according to the GUY WHO NEEDS AN EXCUSE FOR WHY HE SHOT AN UNARMED KID.